KickStarter Solasta Pre-Release Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[Lacrymas]

That's called hype, kill it at all costs.

 

[Salvo]

 

[LESS T_T]

Uh, is this a thing? Isn't the whole point of the SRD that you don't need a license? https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/tacticaladventures/solasta-crown-of-the-magister/posts/2630193

Wizards of the Coast granted us a license to use the Dungeons and Dragons SRD 5.1 Ruleset!

Press release even, with Mathieu Girard's comment and disclaimers all that: https://www.gamasutra.com/view/pres...ACTICAL_RPG_SOLASTA_CROWN_OF_THE_MAGISTER.php

DUNGEONS & DRAGONS SRD 5.1 CONTENT AND RULES COMING TO TACTICAL RPG SOLASTA: CROWN OF THE MAGISTER

And heh, they actually added this to the store page description. I guess they can use those names in marketing materials too?:

Wizards of the Coast granted Tactical Adventures a license to use the Dungeons and Dragons SRD 5.1 Ruleset, further anchoring our will to make the most faithful video game adaptation with the Tabletop Ruleset and craft the game you are hoping for!

Solasta: Crown of the Magister brings back the thrill, tactics, and deep storytelling of tabletop games. As you play, you'll feel yourself reaching for your dice and miniatures. It's time to dive into the world of Solasta. Roll for initiative!

 

[Elex]

https://steamcommunity.com/games/1096530/announcements/detail/1697226147977214896

 

[Riddler]

 

[Infinitron]

https://steamcommunity.com/games/1096530/announcements/detail/1697226147977214896

SOLASTA CHRONICLES - FIGHTER & ROGUE ARCHETYPES

By Aileen Rendyll, Loremaster of the Einarium

Those who survived the immediate effects of the Cataclysm found themselves plunged into a struggle for survival. Many different fighters and fighting styles emerged from the chaos that engulfed Solasta: nobles maintained armed bands to secure their lands, and every merchant house, temple, and town needed armed guards for defense. Each of the new nations had its favored troops, tactics, and equipment. In addition, there were some who made their living as adventurers or mercenaries, whose experiences shaped their fighting style in various ways.

As centuries passed, some styles proved more effective than others. Schools were founded to preserve and refine their traditions, each the product of different needs and circumstances. Here are three of Solasta’s best-known martial traditions.



MOUNTAINEER
Most of Solasta’s martial traditions have their roots in the elite army corps of the Manacalon Empire or the Tirmarian Inquisition. Mountaineers, though, are born out of the ashes of the Cataclysm. For generations, the Marches and the mountains that stand between the Badlands and the more civilized nations have been infested by orcs and other monsters. Many of these creatures make their lairs in dark tunnels, narrow canyons, and cramped ruins. This is the world of the mountaineer.

Mountaineers are specially trained to fight and survive in rocky and vertical environments. They are masters of the shield, which is as much a weapon as a protection in their skilled hands. A mountaineer’s shield can wound or knock down an opponent, and given a wall on one side and a shield in the opposite hand, a skilled mountaineer can be almost invulnerable. Their extreme mobility lets them maneuver in ways that can surprise opponents and give them a considerable tactical advantage. The greatest mountaineers can combine offensive actions into devastating chain attacks.

While mountaineers do not fit the ideal of the elegant, noble warrior, they are impressively efficient killers of Badlands monsters.



SPELLBLADE
Spellblades' detractors often argue about who makes a better Spellblade: a failed wizard whose physical strength can be put to good use, or a reluctant fighter who's a bit too smart to be a good soldier. Those who choose this path, though, do not see it as one of compromise. They study magic as well as physical combat, and are expected to excel in both areas. Many training schools exist, with the most famous one being the Circle of Danantar in the Principality of Masgarth.

Spellblades in training learn to cast cantrips alongside their basic weapons training. Unlike many wizards, spellblades are taught to regard spells as just another weapon, and they restrict their magical studies to whatever can be useful in battle.

This dual focus gives them some unique advantages. For instance, they can imbue ordinary weapons with magic when necessary; and they can also strike enemies with magical force, pushing them back or even knocking them down. The most powerful spellblades are able to teleport in the middle of a fight, confounding their foes and becoming virtually uncatchable.



CHAMPION
Champions are pure fighters who dedicate their lives to perfecting their martial prowess. Their physical training pushes them to the extreme limits of exhaustion, repeating moves and strikes over and over until they are both instinctive and flawless. Such dedication earns them superior fighting abilities. Champions are deadlier than most, able to deliver lethal strikes, and their understanding of battle lets them master two fighting styles when most fighters only use one.

Through their arduous training, champions develop remarkable physical prowess. An experienced champion is an almost unstoppable killing machine, and a formidable example for lesser warriors.

Spoiler

Rogues are unpredictable people. They are versatile, diverse, and full of surprises, all of which makes them hard to describe in a few words. Those who survive long enough can choose from a range of specialist paths that lead to very different careers.



DARKWEAVER
Trained by a secret society that extends throughout the kingdoms of Solasta, Darkweavers have developed techniques to exploit darkness and strike fear into their enemies, and have mastered the arts of crafting and using poison.

They are mostly known for their uncanny climbing ability and their skilled use of the advantage of height. Firing arrows from above, they can strike down their targets with a brutal efficiency that most archers cannot match. They can also drop onto unsuspecting targets with lethal effect.

Moving unseen in the darkness or waiting in a shadowed corner of the ceiling, the venomous Darkweaver is evasive and deadly.



SHADOWCASTER
Trained in the arcane arts as well as in roguish skills, the shadowcasters are stealthy magic users, whose abilities make it almost impossible to guard against their attacks.

Able to cast cantrips and spells from a limited number of schools, shadowcasters can move in the midst of battle even more nimbly than other rogues, and this ability grows until they can actually teleport for short distances. Their defense against spells is also far superior to that of most rogues, especially at high level.

Masters of the shadowcasters’ discipline can cast spells in a similar fashion as their sneak attack, increasing damage when casting while remaining undetected.



THIEF
As might be expected, thieves are mostly motivated by money, but that does not stop some of them from becoming audacious and wide-ranging adventurers, albeit with a very individual approach to the concept of teamwork.

They are skilled pickpockets and burglars, with a talent for climbing, stealth and improvisation. As they grow in skill, they become able to use items that they are not trained to use, intuiting their function by pure cleverness.

 

[Lacrymas]

I always feel like most sub-classes should be feats or spells instead, this isn't very different. Like, give us enough and varied feats and we'll make our own mountaineers and darkweavers. The only exception are the ones that can use magic, it would be clunky if it was a feat. Will this game feature multiclassing?

 

[Rinslin Merwind]

https://steamcommunity.com/games/1096530/announcements/detail/1697226147977214896

"Spellblades' detractors often argue about who makes a better Spellblade: a failed wizard whose physical strength can be put to good use, or a reluctant fighter who's a bit too smart to be a good soldier."
> "fighter who is a bit too smart to be good soldier"
> main stats Dexterity and Charisma in 5e
I wish Bards became smarter from high Charisma in 5e too, there too much cringe inducing stories when tabletop Bard player decide to fuck some monster only to be killed in process and act surprised like an idiot.
Also, example of diplomacy from spellblade:
Spellblade: Don't try it, Sandhater! I have high ground!
Sandhater: I HATE YOU!!11!!

 

[Rinslin Merwind]

I always feel like most sub-classes should be feats or spells instead, this isn't very different. Like, give us enough and varied feats and we'll make our own mountaineers and darkweavers. The only exception are the ones that can use magic, it would be clunky if it was a feat. Will this game feature multiclassing?

Wizard subclasses is ok, I don't see why they should be feats. Despite my memes about Spellblade - it's deserves to be subclass, however special traits of Champion described too vague and don't look special. Mountaineer seems logical from lore, idk about special traits through. Shadowcaster deserves to be subclass, but Thief and Darkweaver similar in their obsession for climbing and stealth, the only difference is that one loves money and others apparently hates it (which is fucking weird).

 

[Lacrymas]

Wizard subclasses can be feats, especially if they are things like Evoker or Transmuter. Maybe only give it as a first level feat choice if you want it to be like a life-long specialization the character has gone through. Which still doesn't make sense if the game features multiclassing. Unless the subclasses drastically change a class, I don't see why they shouldn't be feats. I'd advocate for very sporadic use of subclasses only when it makes design sense, trying to come up with 3 subclasses for each class makes them either trivial or myopic. See exhibit A - PoE2.

 

[Rinslin Merwind]

Wizard sub-classes can be feats, especially if they are things like Evoker or Transmuter. Maybe only give it as a first level feat choice if you want it to be like a life-long specialization the character has gone through. Which still doesn't make sense if the game features multi-classing. Unless the sub-classes drastically change a class, I don't see why they shouldn't be feats. I'd advocate for very sporadic use of sub-classes only when it makes design sense, trying to come up with 3 sub-classes for each class makes them either trivial or myopic. See exhibit A - PoE2.

Look, I know PoE experience with class system can traumatize even most hardened veterans of CRPG ( muscle wizards and intelligent barbarians is too much to handle for most players). But let's wait for more details about influences of sub-classes on gameplay before starting bringing comparisons with other games. If Sawyer at Obsidian decided that subclass add only boring modifier and bonuses it doesn't mean everyone will do that. Call me optimistic, but I hope subclass will at least give unique fun spells that change gameplay and not flat bonuses.

 

[Cryomancer]

A sorcerer/cleric/wizard subclass focused on necromancy would be amazing IMO...

 

[ERYFKRAD]

intelligent barbarians

I don't see a problem here, by choosing to be barbarians they are already showing more intelligence than most.

 

[Cryomancer]

A Barbarian leader of a Barb tribe can be intelligent and understand a lot about religion, politics, language, nature, etc. The idea that all barbarians are dumb is just a awful trope.

 

[Background Character]

SPELLBLADE / SHADOWCASTER

This is gonna be tough for me

 

[Rinslin Merwind]

I don't see a problem here, by choosing to be barbarians they are already showing more intelligence than most.

A Barbarian leader of a Barb tribe can be intelligent and understand a lot about religion, politics, language, nature, etc. The idea that all barbarians are dumb is just a awful trope.

I don't have a problem with barbarians being smart as much as I have problem with fact that high amount of intellect REQUIRED to play efficiently as Barbarian, because class ability depends on it. I don't have anything against people who play high Int barbarian, just let people play dumb Barbarian even if it's overused trope.

 

[NJClaw]

I always feel like most sub-classes should be feats or spells instead, this isn't very different. Like, give us enough and varied feats and we'll make our own mountaineers and darkweavers. The only exception are the ones that can use magic, it would be clunky if it was a feat. Will this game feature multiclassing?

Have you ever played D&D 5th edition?

 

[Spectacle]

I'll withhold judgement on these subclasses until I see the actual mechanics, even if some of the descriptions sound interesting. The subclasses in the Solasta demo were not well designed. The Mountaineer fighter had only weak situational abilities that didn't work well together, while the two caster subclasses were borderline OP. Hopefully every class will have at least one good subclass.

 

[Lacrymas]

Have you ever played D&D 5th edition?

I haven't, no. Does that change the argument I'm making?

 

[NJClaw]

Have you ever played D&D 5th edition?

I haven't, no. Does that change the argument I'm making?

It doesn't change your argument, but it's a pretty pointless argument in the context of a videogame based on D&D 5th edition, a game that tries to avoid feats as much as it can.

"They should do that with feats", in the context of the 5th edition, is like "they could go faster with cars" in the context of 100m at the olympics.

 

[Elex]

Wizard subclasses is ok, I don't see why they should be feats. Despite my memes about Spellblade - it's deserves to be subclass, however special traits of Champion described too vague and don't look special. Mountaineer seems logical from lore, idk about special traits through. Shadowcaster deserves to be subclass, but Thief and Darkweaver similar in their obsession for climbing and stealth, the only difference is that one loves money and others apparently hates it (which is fucking weird).

champion is the fighter subclass present in the SRD and yes is the basic fighter he have passive stuff and nothing more.

Wizard subclasses can be feats, especially if they are things like Evoker or Transmuter. Maybe only give it as a first level feat choice if you want it to be like a life-long specialization the character has gone through. Which still doesn't make sense if the game features multiclassing. Unless the subclasses drastically change a class, I don't see why they shouldn't be feats. I'd advocate for very sporadic use of subclasses only when it makes design sense, trying to come up with 3 subclasses for each class makes them either trivial or myopic. See exhibit A - PoE2.

in 5e all classes have subclass it's not optional. You reach a certain level and select a subclass ( some class at lvl 1 other at 2 or 3)

 

[Mr. Magniloquent]

Have you ever played D&D 5th edition?

I haven't, no. Does that change the argument I'm making?

It doesn't change your argument, but it's a pretty pointless argument in the context of a videogame based on D&D 5th edition, a game that tries to avoid feats as much as it can.

"They should do that with feats", in the context of the 5th edition, is like "they could go faster with cars" in the context of 100m at the olympics.

I get what you're saying here, but to clarify, 5E doesn't avoid feats. It just tries to do quality over quantity. Instead of a long chain of fiddly minor feats abd a prestige class to be a shield oriented fighter, you now have the singular "Shield Master" feat. It's what Lacrymas is looking for.

 

[Lacrymas]

Yes, I want more feats and less subclasses or even prestige classes. What is the point of character building if you have a linear progression and you just have to choose which path to go down on? And if the subclasses are only mundane bullshit like +3 AC when wielding Tower Shields, why is that not a feat? It opens up more choices while taking away none. When a subclass substantially changes the base class, then sure, but most of the time it's not like that. It also brings up the question of why certain base classes aren't subclasses. Why is Paladin or Barbarian not a subclass of Fighter? Why is Ranger not a subclass of Rogue? Not to mention that I know people have been complaining some classes don't bring enough unique things to the table to justify their existence. PoE's system had this exact same problem, too many classes, most of which could've been subclasses of others or simply feats. It's a quantity over quality issue and a design clusterfuck which rustle my jimmies and leave more questions than fix problems.

They wanted to avoid feats (why?) but transferred basically the same system to subclasses, making it more restrictive without any benefit that I can see. It's actually ok to have a lot of feats, even if a lot of them are + to hit with swords or something, as long as they are varied both in strength and substance, and allow for multifaceted character creation. And then when you see that some feats are basically never picked, you revise them. I feel like they tried to change too many things at the same time with the various D&D editions, which might have fixed some problems, but introduced others. Granted, I haven't really gone into detail with 5E, but I'm aware of some of the criticisms, especially those targeted at the class system, which really sounds like the same thing as in 3.5E, overpowered spellcasters and weak melee, limited RP options for a lot of them, ridiculous power gaps between subclasses of the same class to the point of some of them not being played ever, etc. etc.

 

[Riddler]

Yes, I want more feats and less subclasses or even prestige classes. What is the point of character building if you have a linear progression and you just have to choose which path to go down on? And if the subclasses are only mundane bullshit like +3 AC when wielding Tower Shields, why is that not a feat? It opens up more choices while taking away none. When a subclass substantially changes the base class, then sure, but most of the time it's not like that. It also brings up the question of why certain base classes aren't subclasses. Why is Paladin or Barbarian not a subclass of Fighter? Why is Ranger not a subclass of Rogue? Not to mention that I know people have been complaining some classes don't bring enough unique things to the table to justify their existence. PoE's system had this exact same problem, too many classes, most of which could've been subclasses of others or simply feats. It's a quantity over quality issue and a design clusterfuck which rustle my jimmies and leave more questions than fix problems.

They wanted to avoid feats (why?) but transferred basically the same system to subclasses, making it more restrictive without any benefit that I can see. It's actually ok to have a lot of feats, even if a lot of them are + to hit with swords or something, as long as they are varied both in strength and substance, and allow for multifaceted character creation. And then when you see that some feats are basically never picked, you revise them. I feel like they tried to change too many things at the same time with the various D&D editions, which might have fixed some problems, but introduced others.

IE. You want it to be 3.5E or Pathfinder, not 5E.

 

[Lacrymas]

Here's the thing with that. Is any given Darkweaver for example substantially different than any other Darkweaver at lvl 20? I honestly have no idea and that's a genuine question, I should read the Player's Handbook I guess, but since this is the only game I know of which is going to use the system I'm not very motivated.